Further Restrictions Announced by Johnson (22/09)

[Scrotnig]

i think it's clear that the "these rules are for you lot, not us" attitude isn't confined to one party, or even one country.

 

[DB]

If we have a further full lockdown (but the schools stay open) above and beyond a fortnight, what happens then if the numbers of cases still rises? Do we stay in lockdown for an eternity - into the new year, or do they finally twig that it might be the pupils passing it around and bringing the virus home? Think that's the reason they don't want uni students going home, otherwise why stop them?

They need to realise that this open-close-open-close stupidity will never work - the virus wil do what viruses do. Time to stop pretending, and just make the best of the situation with a sensible level of consistent restrictions (i.e. like Sweden!).

 

[Howardh]

i think it's clear that the "these rules are for you lot, not us" attitude isn't confined to one party, or even one country.

Would you believe it - a Tory MP tweeting a load of old cobblers;

https://twitter.com/timloughton/status/1310485977291534336

Parliament is exempt the same as all royal palaces. However the bars have been closed completely since March anyway so we have more restrictions than the public at large.

They just don't know when to stop lying do they??

 

[brad465]

I realise he is a government advisor but it's funny that the actions of Stephen Kinnock and Ian Blackford amongst many others breaking restrictions are seldom if ever mentioned by people almost like there's a political bias

Neither of those had their actions repeatedly defended by those highest in government.

Robert Jenrick arguably broke lockdown rules more severely than any of them and even more than Cummings, with his multiple trips to a second home in Hertfordshire and also to see his parents in Shropshire, yet he remains in his post while being an elected MP and member of cabinet, on top of all his alleged corruption practices not linked to Covid; disgraceful doesn't go far enough to describe him.

 

[takno]

I realise he is a government advisor but it's funny that the actions of Stephen Kinnock and Ian Blackford amongst many others breaking restrictions are seldom if ever mentioned by people almost like there's a political bias

Much as I dislike Stephen Kinnock, as far as I'm aware all he did was went to his elderly parents to deliver a care package and waved through the window. It's questionable whether this was against the rules at the time at all, and if it was then Kinnock presumably didn't know it was against the rules or he would hardly have publicised doing it on Twitter. Either way it certainly wasn't the same type of knowing, brazen and complete disregard of the rules as was committed by Cummings.

I'm not sure where political bias comes into it anyway, since all those cases were publicised at the time. If people of all parties didn't feel as let down by Kinnock as they did by Cummings then that probably tells you everything you need to know about the fact that the two cases were completely different.

 

[greyman42]

Sadiq Khan being very pro lockdown seems particularly odd to me. Given the well publicised negative impacts that the Covid-19 measures are having on London’s economy, London having a young population and lockdowns generally being harder on city than country dwellers (smaller homes and gardens, etc), I would have thought that would have made him at least somewhat wary of advocating tighter restrictions, but obviously not. He does seem to be more on the authoritarian side of the Libertarian - Authoritarian scale so I guess that explains it.

Khan does not like pubs and a lockdown would see them shut.

Much as I dislike Stephen Kinnock, as far as I'm aware all he did was went to his elderly parents to deliver a care package and waved through the window.

If i remember correctly, he was sat in the garden with his old man.

 

[Class 33]

The cases are heading down MASSIVELY now. Cases down for the THIRD day in a row, and down a MASSIVE 41% since Friday's 6,842 cases. Cases are certainly not continuing to SURGE. So there is absolutely no reason atall for this proposed TWO WEEK(initially!) "Social lockdown" across Northern England and London to go ahead. But of course knowing this government, they'll still go ahead with this. They don't care about the effect this will have on the economy and people's mental health in these regions.

 

[birchesgreen]

Not proposed in the NE anymore, been announced by Hancock Half Hour in the Commons.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Khan does not like pubs and a lockdown would see them shut.

This is a very interesting point. Khan is Muslim, and therefore presumably does not drink and does not approve of drinking establishments (unless he's very, very moderate indeed). Could this affect his view on hospitality?

As for Hancock, he's just announced, it seems, that the policy is suppression and not elimination. I wonder what Sturgeon will think of that? She's clearly been on an elimination path so far.

 

[WelshBluebird]

This is a very interesting point. Khan is Muslim, and therefore presumably does not drink and does not approve of drinking establishments (unless he's very, very moderate indeed). Could this affect his view on hospitality?

Isn't he known as a pretty moderate Muslim anyway? Pretty sure his voting history shows that too (e.g. he voted in favour of gay marriage etc).
Granted he doesn't drink himself but has supported pubs in the past on various fronts, plus hospitality means restaurants aswell so not just pubs.
Tbh any suggestion that he wants lockdown because of his own beliefs about alcohol sound to me like dog whistling Islamophobia than anything that has any reality to it. And given the campaign the right wing tried to pull back when he was elected - it isn't like people don't have form for that kind of thing about him!

 

[NorthOxonian]

This is a very interesting point. Khan is Muslim, and therefore presumably does not drink and does not approve of drinking establishments (unless he's very, very moderate indeed). Could this affect his view on hospitality?

As for Hancock, he's just announced, it seems, that the policy is suppression and not elimination. I wonder what Sturgeon will think of that? She's clearly been on an elimination path so far.

I doubt it - he appointed a "nightlife tsar" (yes it's a meaningless title but it shows it's an issue on his radar) and has worked on ensuring nightclubs can get soundproofing so they don't get shut down for noise complaints. I think his problem is that he hasn't thought through the consequences, rather than wanting hospitality in London to be destroyed forever.

 

[DB]

As for Hancock, he's just announced, it seems, that the policy is suppression and not elimination.

But to what end, and for what purpose? Suppression will just drag the situation out longer and the only justifiable reason for it would be if the NHS was at real risk of being overwhelmed.

 

[bramling]

If we have a further full lockdown (but the schools stay open) above and beyond a fortnight, what happens then if the numbers of cases still rises? Do we stay in lockdown for an eternity - into the new year, or do they finally twig that it might be the pupils passing it around and bringing the virus home? Think that's the reason they don't want uni students going home, otherwise why stop them?

A good reason not to have one. We still don’t have an exit strategy, so when there’s no effect on case numbers (as there wouldn’t be within two weeks) we’ll have people wanting to keep it going.

i think it's clear that the "these rules are for you lot, not us" attitude isn't confined to one party, or even one country.

Absolutely. A lot of the “I want to keep working from home so I don’t have to get up in the morning” brigade will moan about how dangerous it is to get on a train or go to their office, but will quite happily eat out to help out, or take the train for a day out in Brighton.

 

[Scotrail12]

Listening to Dan Wootton's radio show. Poll taken said that 82% of viewers were against the measures taken by Boris whilst only 18% were in favour.

 

[Huntergreed]

Listening to Dan Wootton's radio show. Poll taken said that 82% of viewers were against the measures taken by Boris whilst only 18% were in favour.

That’s reassuring. I’m certain the tide is turning, albeit slowly.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Absolutely. A lot of the “I want to keep working from home so I don’t have to get up in the morning” brigade will moan about how dangerous it is to get on a train or go to their office, but will quite happily eat out to help out, or take the train for a day out in Brighton.

The solution to that, of course, is that if home-working is genuinely practical in their job - which for many office jobs it is - it should be allowed, COVID or not.

Forcing people back into offices so that sandwich shops survive is silly. Instead, help those businesses out with relocation and repurposing grants. With suburbia full of people all day, rather than emptying out at 7am and filling back up at 6pm, businesses there will be more viable. We could for instance see the return of the proverbial local butcher, baker and candlestick maker, as you might well go for a walk to a local parade of shops to have a cafe lunch, then grab stuff for dinner from local businesses like those. (As a home worker I can definitely say that getting out for lunch does help the monotony, but at present there's not a lot locally so it is by car).

The shift to home working was going to happen anyway, it's just that it happened in 6 months rather than maybe 10 years.

 

[Ianno87]

Absolutely. A lot of the “I want to keep working from home so I don’t have to get up in the morning” brigade will moan about how dangerous it is to get on a train or go to their office, but will quite happily eat out to help out, or take the train for a day out in Brighton.

You do realise that most good employers would've noticed by now if particular employees productivity was below par?

Nowt wrong with a day out in Brighton if you manage your full time workload around it and are available for calls/contact as required.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Nowt wrong with a day out in Brighton if you manage your full time workload around it and are available for calls/contact as required.

When I've had to work on something specific I've sometimes done exactly that sort of thing, sitting working in Costabucks or wherever. Doesn't work so well if you've got conference calls, but if you haven't it's no issue at all.

"Working from home" is really "working remotely". It makes no odds where you actually are.

FWIW, I wish more hotels would do a 5pm late checkout so I can do this more easily. Ibis do, but none of the others do, you have to book a second night which can be pricey (so I tend not to bother), even though plenty of people don't check into hotels until the late evening, so if you say charged £20-30 for the late checkout but allowed a £5 discount for saying you won't check in until say 6pm I reckon it would work.

 

[bramling]

You do realise that most good employers would've noticed by now if particular employees productivity was below par?

Nowt wrong with a day out in Brighton if you manage your full time workload around it and are available for calls/contact as required.

There’s everything wrong with it if such people want lockdown restrictions in order to allow this lifestyle to continue, which is essentially what some people are advocating.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There’s everything wrong with it if such people want lockdown restrictions in order to allow this lifestyle to continue, which is essentially what some people are advocating.

Agreed, I just think businesses should start offering that sort of flexible working anyway! My employer does, I've quite openly been not actually at home on a number of occasions and they're fine with it, all they care is that the work is done and all scheduled calls are attended. Only other risk I suppose you've got is confidentiality if you're sat in a coffee shop, so if that's applicable a screen privacy device is sensible.

 

[45107]

Slightly off-topic. I have no link for this, but Nederland government just announced bars shut at 2200 (sound similar) and no supporters allowed at football for 3 weeks.

it is not just the UK that is imposing restrictions

 

[Ianno87]

There’s everything wrong with it if such people want lockdown restrictions in order to allow this lifestyle to continue, which is essentially what some people are advocating.

But if they're allocated 35-40 hours worth of work each week, and it always gets done to satisfactory quality, what exactly is the problem?

 

[Howardh]

Slightly off-topic. I have no link for this, but Nederland government just announced bars shut at 2200 (sound similar) and no supporters allowed at football for 3 weeks.

it is not just the UK that is imposing restrictions

I think games have had a limited number of fans, but singing and chanting banned!!

 

[bramling]

But if they're allocated 35-40 hours worth of work each week, and it always gets done to satisfactory quality, what exactly is the problem?

Pushing for all this to continue so as to support the “it’s too dangerous to return to the office” narrative. My local Facebook site is full of all this, as are many of my neighbours - they seem to relish the idea of a return to full lockdown, which I just don’t get.

 

[Ianno87]

Pushing for all this to continue so as to support the “it’s too dangerous to return to the office” narrative. My local Facebook site is full of all this, as are many of my neighbours - they seem to relish the idea of a return to full lockdown, which I just don’t get.

In which case, it should be really the employer offering more flexibility in future so people didn't feel thet had to push for this.

 

[bramling]

In which case, it should be really the employer offering more flexibility in future so people didn't feel thet had to push for this.

Yes perhaps, but the fact that employers have found themselves with people who suddenly can’t be bothered to travel to the office like they signed up to do is not my (or yours, or anyone else’s) problem, yet some people are making it so by wanting all this to go on for as long as possible.

 

[VauxhallandI]

Pushing for all this to continue so as to support the “it’s too dangerous to return to the office” narrative. My local Facebook site is full of all this, as are many of my neighbours - they seem to relish the idea of a return to full lockdown, which I just don’t get.

I’m sure I can see people actively wanting to carry this on just so they can work from home. I can’t believe people would sacrifice the freedoms of travel and interactions with others so they can work at home. It’s not sustainable.

Any supplier with its salt will shift towards a more remote working option if possible so if people are so inclined they can change job to reach that goal.

I’m lucky in that my employer will let me continue in the future to work at home if I so choose but I’m firmly against another lockdown.

 

[Mojo]

But if they're allocated 35-40 hours worth of work each week, and it always gets done to satisfactory quality, what exactly is the problem?

I think the problem is, that many employers (especially those in the public sector) seem to account for the fact that less work is getting done with people “working” from home. If people are doing routine tasks for which time can be allocated, such as data entry or other processing tasks, then I would agree with you.

The technology for many things is just not there yet. I remember many occasions my partner trying to have “meetings“ from home, the “meeting” invariably starting late, having people missing, muted or webcams not working. As a customer I’ve also suffered numerous times with call centres and attempting to hold conversations with people over what I assume to be a domestic internet connection.

 

[GusB]

I think the problem is, that many employers (especially those in the public sector) seem to account for the fact that less work is getting done with people “working” from home. If people are doing routine tasks for which time can be allocated, such as data entry or other processing tasks, then I would agree with you.

The technology for many things is just not there yet. I remember many occasions my partner trying to have “meetings“ from home, the “meeting” invariably starting late, having people missing, muted or webcams not working. As a customer I’ve also suffered numerous times with call centres and attempting to hold conversations with people over what I assume to be a domestic internet connection.

Regarding your last point, and having been a home worker long before the whole Covid thing kicked off, many workers are indeed at the mercy of domestic connections. In my case we logged into a separate system for calls which actually fed them down the landline (rather than being pure VOIP).

One issue I found was that many of my virtual co-workers simply didn't have the basic technical skills. It was most frustrating to have to spend the first part of a meeting or training session having to wait for people to sort out their equipment.

 

[LOL The Irony]

The technology for many things is just not there yet. I remember many occasions my partner trying to have “meetings“ from home, the “meeting” invariably starting late, having people missing, muted or webcams not working. As a customer I’ve also suffered numerous times with call centres and attempting to hold conversations with people over what I assume to be a domestic internet connection.

I can tell you right now that remote learning is a royal pita, so you have my sympathies.